Tupac Shakur’s estate is threatening to sue Drake for using an AI-generated voice on a new diss track against Kendrick Lamar, calling it a “flagrant viоlatiоn” of the law and “abusive.” blatant” his voice. heritage.
According to a cease-and-desist letter received by Billboard on Wednesday, lawyer Howard King warned Drake (Aubrey Drake Graham) that he must remove his “Taylor Made Freestyle” within 24 hours or the family will “follow” all legal options.
“The Estate is extremely disappointed and disappointed by your unauthоrized use of Tupac’s voice and personality,” King wrote. Besides violating Tupac’s publicity rights and the estate’s legal rights, this song abuses one of the greatest hip-hop musicians’ legacy. Heritage would never allow this.”
Drake released “Taylor Made” on Friday, continuing his verbal bаttle with Lamar. Based on LA, the tune took down Kendrick and Taylor Swift and used artificial intelligence to produce bogus verses from Tupac and Snoop Dogg, two West Coast giants Lamar adored.
Drake has previously opposed people utilizing his image, Wednesday’s letter noted. Besides last year’s “Heart on My Sleeve” controversy, King cited a lesser-known federal lawsuit in which Drake’s lawyers accused a website of using his image without permission.
The organization said “Taylor Made Freestyle” has garnered over a million streams and been widely reported in the national news as well as renowned entertainment websites and publications. This position writes. “There is no doubt that it is many times more serious and damaging than a low-traffic website photo of you with someone else.”
Finally, the letter asked written proof by noon Pacific Thursday that Drake’s agents “expeditiously took all necessary steps to remove it.”
“If you comply, the estate will consider whether an informal negotiation to resolve this matter is appropriate,” King wrote. Our customer authorizes us to pursue legal remedies, including copyright, publicity, and human rights infringement, damages, injunctive relief, punitive damages, and attorney’s fees, if compliance is not met.
AI-generated Tupac raps in Drake’s song, “Kendrick, we need ya, savior of the West Coast/ Carve your nаme into some hip-hop history.” You seem a little scаred about all the exposure if you handle this situation ruthlessly.”
Tupac’s estate wrote to Drake on Tuesday saying Drake’s use of his voice breached his rights of publicity. your likeness. He was especially criticized for attacking Lamar with his voice.
The illegаl, equally regrettable use of Tupac’s voice against Kendrick Lamar, a good friend of the Estate, who publicly and personally trashed Tupac and his legacy, King said, adding insult to ιnjury.
Drake’s representative wouldn’t address the Shakur estate’s assertions.
Snoop Dogg, who sang on “Taylor Made,” may challenge Drake’s song in court. He released a video on social media on Saturday showing him learning the song for the first time: “What did they do? When? How? Are you sure?” Snoop Dogg’s rep did not respond.
Since AI-powered technologies may imitate real musicians, voice cloning has become one of the music industry’s most contentious legal issues. Convincingly is simpler than ever.
Last year, an unknown artist entitled Ghostwriter released “Heart On My Sleeve” with Drake’s fictional verses, sparking the controversy. As voice cloning has spread online, industry groups, legal experts, and policymakers have argued how to stop it.
Not as easy as it seems. Cloned vocals often feature fresh words and music, making federal copyrights harder to apply. The estate argues that rights of publicity are more relevant since they protect someone’s likeness, although they have historically been used to suit over commercials and other commercial uses of creative works like music.
The recording industry and top artists have advocated for new laws to overcome legal uncertainties. Tennessee expanded its right of publicity provisions beyond advertising to outlaw voice copying last month with the ELVIS Act. Washingtоn DC lawmakers are also exploring similar proposals to expand federal disclosure rights.
In Wednesday’s letter, the estate stated that California’s publicity rights statute bans Drake’s use of Tupac’s accent in “Taylor Made.” According to King, the song created “substantial economic and reputational harm” by giving “the false impression that the estate and Tupac promoting or endorsing the lyrics sounded similar.”
The estate also claimed that an AI model “training” on Tupac’s earlier recordings could have developed the song, violating its copyright. The legality of using copyrighted “input” is another hotly debated subject in various AI developer cases, including one by major music publishers.